Romans

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't particularly like Murray on Romans, actually. *Ducks to avoid heresy charges.* I found myself disagreeing with him in passage after passage, and was left wondering why so many in the Reformed world think it is one of the best. I wouldn't want to avoid him, but neither is he in my top five or even ten.
I preferred Shedd's treatment of Roman over Murray's. Audible gasp.
 
And if you want to read a patristic commentary, Chrysostom's is the standard. He is nowhere as useful as Moo, but even technical scholars today still refer to Chrysostom's analysis of a particular Greek text.
 

It's not a commentary, but there is a sermon series here by the late Rev Donald MacLean which you might find both useful and edifying.

Edit to note that if you're not from Scotland you might find Mr MacLean's accent a little hard to follow, but if you can manage, the subject matter should more than make up for it.
 
Last edited:

It's not a commentary, but there is a sermon series here by the late Rev Donald MacLean which you might find both useful and edifying.

Edit to note that if you're not from Scotland you might find Mr MacLean's accent a little hard to follow, but if you can manage, the subject matter should more than make up for it.
Neil, for me this shows up about half a dozen sermons on the first couple of chapters. Do you know if there are more sermons in this series which aren't online?

I'd give a wee thumbs up for John Murray as well as Hodge and Haldane.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top